6 ms·

See here for four more comps based on the same layout: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Labs/Jetpack/FlightDeck https://wiki.mozilla.org/Labs/Jetpack/FlightDeck This

by cscotta 17y ago

See here for four more comps based on the same layout: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Labs/Jetpack/FlightDeck https://wiki.mozilla.org/Labs/Jetpack/FlightDeck This is pretty shameful. These were all posted by wiki user Dandonkulous (Daniel Buechner; @dandonkulous), who was Metalab's contact in the article. These may just be comps rather than a full product, but regardless, they demonstrate that significant effort has gone into producing a nearly identical copy of the original Metalab design. That's disappointing; if these allegations are correct, I'm very disappointed in Daniel and those involved at Mozilla in creating this product. Update: Mozilla has removed the screenshots. Here are three of them: - http://u.phoreo.com/gn.png http://u.phoreo.com/gn.png - http://u.phoreo.com/1x.png http://u.phoreo.com/1x.png - http://u.phoreo.com/gq.png http://u.phoreo.com/gq.png

Timothee 17y ago
Actually, there are still available through the history of the document you linked to. In particular: https://wiki.mozilla.org/index.php?title=Labs/Jetpack/FlightDeck&direction=prev&oldid=207253 https://wiki.mozilla.org/index.php?title=Labs/Jetpack/Flight...
lotharbot 17y ago
Within minutes of your post, the screenshots were removed from that page. Looks like someone on the mozilla end is watching. You can still see a screenshot at https://wiki.mozilla.org/File:FlightDeck_Editor.png https://wiki.mozilla.org/File:FlightDeck_Editor.png as of this posting. To the guys at mozilla: do the right thing. It's too late to bury this.
- dirtbox 17y ago
  It's more likely the start of an effort to set the record straight rather than bury it. Or at least it should be.
- DEinspanjer 17y ago
  Aside from the rights and wrongs done by both companies, ^^ this sentiment is the one that really makes me mad. Mozilla gets notification from a company that they screwed up. Mozilla begins removing the objectionable material without delay. Mozilla gets flamed for "burying evidence". I imagine this flame can't hurt as bad as the alternate one where people say Mozilla is just flaunting their wrongdoing by not taking the material down, but sheesh!
  - lotharbot 17y ago
    The issue had already gone public. The guys at Mozilla had a choice. They could either remove the material and play dumb, or remove the material, acknowledge the issue, and work with MetaLabs to find a satisfactory solution. At issue was not "removing the objectionable material", but "removing the material without any acknowledgment". I find it surprising you would consider my call to Mozilla to "do the right thing" a flame. There was no anger or malice in anything I said, just a desire for someone at Mozilla to say "we are working with MetaLabs to sort out this issue". (I say all of this as a supporter of Mozilla, and a long-time user of the Mosaic-Netscape-Firefox browsers.)
    - jasonlotito 17y ago
      MetaLabs: Hey, you guys are murdering children. We aren't going to contact you to confirm. Instead, we are going to publicly rip you a new one and make assumptions. Someone at Mozilla: Whoa! Something went wrong. We didn't mean it that way, but let's fix it right away because we can. Someone else at Moz: Should we say something? Someone at Mozilla: No, we shouldn't. We don't have the whole story, and we don't want to make even more mistakes by saying something that isn't true. Someone else at Moz: Okay. At least we started on the path of fixing the problem. Public: OMGWTFBBQ COVERUP!!!!!! SPAEK NOW FOOLZ!!!
      - lotharbot 17y ago
        "we don't want to make even more mistakes by saying something that isn't true." "We are working with MetaLabs to resolve the issue" would have been a perfectly fine public response. It would have made Mozilla's intentions clear, without piling on any new mistakes. (BTW I find it interesting that people are yelling at me about jumping to conclusions, while themselves jumping to conclusions about me jumping to conclusions.)
        jasonlotito 17y ago
        Considering there was very little time between them reporting the issue and Mozilla changing the offending post, I don't think they had time to "work with MetaLab."

by cscotta 17y ago

Timothee 17y ago

Actually, there are still available through the history of the document you linked to. In particular: https://wiki.mozilla.org/index.php?title=Labs/Jetpack/FlightDeck&direction=prev&oldid=207253 https://wiki.mozilla.org/index.php?title=Labs/Jetpack/Flight...

lotharbot 17y ago

Within minutes of your post, the screenshots were removed from that page. Looks like someone on the mozilla end is watching. You can still see a screenshot at https://wiki.mozilla.org/File:FlightDeck_Editor.png https://wiki.mozilla.org/File:FlightDeck_Editor.png as of this posting. To the guys at mozilla: do the right thing. It's too late to bury this.

dirtbox 17y ago
It's more likely the start of an effort to set the record straight rather than bury it. Or at least it should be.
DEinspanjer 17y ago
Aside from the rights and wrongs done by both companies, ^^ this sentiment is the one that really makes me mad. Mozilla gets notification from a company that they screwed up. Mozilla begins removing the objectionable material without delay. Mozilla gets flamed for "burying evidence". I imagine this flame can't hurt as bad as the alternate one where people say Mozilla is just flaunting their wrongdoing by not taking the material down, but sheesh!
- lotharbot 17y ago
  The issue had already gone public. The guys at Mozilla had a choice. They could either remove the material and play dumb, or remove the material, acknowledge the issue, and work with MetaLabs to find a satisfactory solution. At issue was not "removing the objectionable material", but "removing the material without any acknowledgment". I find it surprising you would consider my call to Mozilla to "do the right thing" a flame. There was no anger or malice in anything I said, just a desire for someone at Mozilla to say "we are working with MetaLabs to sort out this issue". (I say all of this as a supporter of Mozilla, and a long-time user of the Mosaic-Netscape-Firefox browsers.)
  - jasonlotito 17y ago
    MetaLabs: Hey, you guys are murdering children. We aren't going to contact you to confirm. Instead, we are going to publicly rip you a new one and make assumptions. Someone at Mozilla: Whoa! Something went wrong. We didn't mean it that way, but let's fix it right away because we can. Someone else at Moz: Should we say something? Someone at Mozilla: No, we shouldn't. We don't have the whole story, and we don't want to make even more mistakes by saying something that isn't true. Someone else at Moz: Okay. At least we started on the path of fixing the problem. Public: OMGWTFBBQ COVERUP!!!!!! SPAEK NOW FOOLZ!!!
    - lotharbot 17y ago
      "we don't want to make even more mistakes by saying something that isn't true." "We are working with MetaLabs to resolve the issue" would have been a perfectly fine public response. It would have made Mozilla's intentions clear, without piling on any new mistakes. (BTW I find it interesting that people are yelling at me about jumping to conclusions, while themselves jumping to conclusions about me jumping to conclusions.)
      - jasonlotito 17y ago
        Considering there was very little time between them reporting the issue and Mozilla changing the offending post, I don't think they had time to "work with MetaLab."